COMP1205 Disability and legislation

Slides from expert lecturer, provides an overview of current UK legislation, explores perceptions and attitudes and how legislation affects the role of the IT professional. Includes links to additional material

One world, one web ... but great diversity

The mantra "One World, One Web" has a strong appeal to Web developers. They think of it as a design philosophy based on use of internationally agreed open standards for providing universal access to networked resources and services available on the World Wide Web. But does the available evidence show that practices match this philosophy? How would such an approach work in a Web 2.0 environment in which users may be authors of content? This paper reviews the limitations of the dependence on a single WAI model and WCAG 1.0 guidelines. It describes a holistic approach to Web accessibility that has been discussed previously. There are additional complexities of accessibility in a Web 2.0 environment, in which not only can readers be creators of Web resources in a variety of formats, but also content can be surfaced in a variety of ways, addressed in this paper. The authors describe how the holistic model, initially developed to support the development of accessible e-learning in a Web 2.0 context, is well-suited for a Web 2.0 environment. The paper provides a case study to illustrate how this holistic approach can be applied in the development of Web resources for users with learning difficulties. The paper concludes by arguing that future work to enhance the accessibility of Web services should focus on the development and commissioning processes rather than continue the current narrow emphasis on the compliance with universal accessibility guidelines of the digital resources themselves, independently of the context of their use. Finally, the paper refers to two new developments that support the wider focus, providing for individual user-centred accessibility with descriptions of resources and components enabling adaptation of resources to individual needs and preferences

Bay 13 pecha kucha

The talks are by EA Draffan, Nawar Halabi, Gareth Beeston and Neil Rogers. In 6m40s and 20 slides, each member of Bay 13 will introduce themselves, explaining their background and research interests, so those in WAIS can put a name to a face, and chat after the event if there are common interests

Implementing Inclusive Teaching and Learning in UK Higher Education – Utilising Universal Design for Learning (UDL) as a Route to Excellence

The UK higher education (HE) sector is undertaking reforms to the Disabled Students’ Allowance (DSA), until recently the primary means of funding support for eligible disabled students. (Operation of DSA is slightly different in Scotland but similar principles apply.) In a government-commissioned report, embedding Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and inclusive practices was proposed as an approach to reducing reliance on the DSA. This research examines the circumstances in which UDL is currently operating in a cross-section of English higher education providers with a view to contributing to a currently patchy evidence base. Focus groups, interviews and questionnaires were utilised to collect data from four universities and disability support staff. Pockets of good practice such as inclusive virtual learning environments were identified, and it is noted that such strategies benefit all students rather than just those who would have been entitled to DSA. Strategic engagement and embedding UDL was thought to require joined-up thinking between various staff groups under the direction of a named senior leader. Participants suggested that this did not happen coherently. Students felt that systems in place to support their learning were hard to navigate. Some staff were surprised that they were not communicating about this as effectively as they thought. A sector-wide benchmark does not currently exist and would be a helpful tool for creating a stronger foundation on which to build change

Completion, comments and repurposing a digital accessibility MOOC

The ‘massive’ and ‘open’ nature of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) can provide powerful dissemination tools to raise awareness of topics in need of public attention, such as digital accessibility and its impact on assistive technology users. The subject is a wide-ranging one when taught from the point of view of those who may have sensory, physical and/or cognitive impairments coping with a myriad of digital activities on a daily basis. These may range from creating and viewing documents, surfing the web to using a mobile or a washing machine. An analysis of the interactions and learning experiences of those who completed the FutureLearn Digital Accessibility MOOC was conducted, using a combination of statistical and qualitative methods. Preliminary results indicate a progressive loss of participants over time, which is to be expected with MOOCs. However, certain measures such as the number of comments per participant, completed steps, and the “likes” count suggest a relatively high degree of engagement from this particular learning community. After examining the topics that triggered most participation, a suggestion has been formulated to repurpose parts of the course in order to exploit its most engaging sections and offer alternative forms of support for those activities that required more explanation.</p

In search of a decision-making framework for involving users who have learning disabilities or sensory impairments in the process of designing future technologies

A comprehensive literature review was undertaken in order to identify design approaches that have been employed with users who have learning disabilities or sensory impairment; the factors that influenced their choices and the extent to which the approaches and techniques adopted were successful. There was a huge variation across the corpus regarding whether a justification was offered for the choice of approach and the extent to which those justifications were supported by evidence. In addition there was a lack of comprehensive evaluation of the design approaches. Technology designers who intend working with users with learning disabilities or sensory impairments therefore currently have little to help them decide which design approach might be the most appropriate or effective